On F22, the manpage for dnf says the update and update-to
commands are deprecated aliases for upgrade and upgrade-to.
That being the case, shouldn't the update-info and
check-update commands also be deprecated and have
corresponding upgrade versions?
Jon H. LaBadie jonfu(a)jgcomp.com
I cannot finish the installation of VLC 'because in my computer there' is
not the key GCG.
The *command*:* sudo install VLC* ends with the error message:
GPG key retrieval failed: [Errno 14] curl # 37 - "Could not open file / etc
/ pki / rpm-gpg / RPM-GPG-KEY-RPMFusion-free-fedora-21"
to my knowledge, it should be, in the / etc / pki / rpm-gpg, the file
/ RPM-GPG-KEY-RPMFusion-free-fedora-21 (which has the encryption key
required for installation).
I do not know the reason, but I didn't get this file, and currently the
installation can not 'be completed ...
May some one sais me *how I can find and import this file* (/
RPM-GPG-KEY-RPMFusion-free-fedora-21) on my computer??
I've been occasionally using a Windows 7 VM with the libvirt system for
several months now and have had no problems up to now. However recently
I've been getting error messages from Windows about the network being
"unknown" and my shared host/guest volume is unavailable. On the most
recent attempt I see:
Virtual network 'default': NAT (Inactive)
as the entry under the Network Source drop-down in Virtual Machine
Manager's "Show Hardware Details" menu.
This is most likely PEBKAC but I'd be grateful for a newbie's guide to
how this stuff should be set up without straying too far from defaults.
My goal is pretty simple: a bridged network to get shared folders with
my Fedora 23 host and Internet client access from the guest.
I'm running Fedora/KDE 23 on a ThinkPad T510 laptop.
If I leave the laptop open but idle for about 5 minutes
the screen goes blank, and I see no way to "wake" it.
The laptop seems to be alive, as the WiFi LED is flashing,
and Ctrl-Alt-Delete causes the disk LED to flash briefly.
I've tried everything I can to wake the laptop,
including many combinations of Fn, Ctrl, Alt and F*,
as well as what I take to be the SysReq button.
But the only solution I have found to date
is to power-off and power-on again.
gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin
I've to update 3 laptops from Ferdora 22 to fedora 23.
"dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23" wants to download 1.6 GB.
I don't want to do this 3 times and came to the following idea:
Host 1 Host 2
dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=23
/var/cache/dnf/i386/23 ---------------------> /var/cache/dnf/i386/23
/var/cache/yum/i386/23 ---------------------> /var/cache/yum/i386/23
dnf system-upgrade reboot dnf system-upgrade reboot
Will this work?
Is this version going to be available on F23 or F24
Also, Is there any How To about setting up things so that Android Studio
uses the Oracle Java but the rest of the programs use Open JDK? Is using a
VM the only way to do it? I'd rather not have to do that.
|O O| pepebuho(a)gmail.com
~~~~ Javier Perez
~~~~ While the night runs
~~~~ toward the day...
m m Pepebuho watches
from his high perch.
After copying an ISO of fedora 23 x86_64 into a USB key with the dd
command, everything is fine - I can boot with that USB
However, there is one machine where I have to use nosmp so that it
will boot. There is some hw problem with this issue but
this machine is only for simple tests so I don't mind that it will
work as a non SMP machine,
So I want to change the grub of the USB disk on key (add "nosmp" to
the kernel command line)
When I boot into fedora from hard disk and try to mount it, it is
mounted as read-only. Also specifying "rw" and a boot options does not
it - it refuses to do so:
mount /dev/sdc1 -o rw /mnt/sdc1
Failed to execute operation: Access denied.
Any ideas if there is anything I can do make this USB read-write ? or
is there a way to perapare Live Fedora USB key so that it could be
mounted from the Hard Disk as read-write ?
Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com>:
> FYI, gmail puts your emails in spam for the following reason:
> Why is this message in Spam? It has a from address in yahoo.com.au but
> has failed yahoo.com.au's required tests for authentication.
That's particularly odd, since to send emails using this address, I
actually post them through Yahoo's SMTP server, and it demands that I
login and authenticate (and every now and then they screw that up, by
changing how I do that - different ports, protocols). So, Yahoo ought
to be relaying that message with good headers (for want of a better
To post to a yahoo smtp server, I have to set Evolution to connect to
port 465 (at the moment, this has changed over time) using SSL, and
supply a username and password (at the moment, the username is the bit
left of the @ sign, not the whole email address, but I seem to recall
that has changed, over time, and had to be discovered by experiment,
because their own instructions were crap).
If that doesn't tell yahoo that I am the right person to send an email
coming from the address that I'm using, I don't know what else will do
> I'm seeing an increase in list emails dumped into spam with the same
> kind of message. I'm not sure what's failed, this is the best clue I
> Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of
> users-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org designates 188.8.131.52 as
> permitted sender) client-ip=184.108.40.206;
> Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
> spf=pass (google.com: domain of
> users-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org designates 220.127.116.11 as
> permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=users-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org;
> dmarc=fail (p=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=yahoo.com.au
Have you checked the IP isn't on a blacklist?
Is the bounce address supposed to be authenticated in some way?
Are the Fedora SPF records in order?
Is gmail being particularly dumb about list mail (being stupid about the
plethora of different "from" addresses from all the participants)?
I'm not convinced that SPF is all that it's cracked up to be. I still
get the odd spam that's supposedly checked and okay. As well as mail
passed through various systems, without being stopped, despite having
headers declaring it as unverified or even some kind of outright
I have my own domain, and supposedly I ought to configure things to make
use of SPF, but the instructional info is incomprehensible. Not to
mention, the additional headache in trying to work out how to do that
through my website and mail hosting company interface (with an unknown
number of other members sharing IPs thanks to virtual name-based
hosting). Sure, it comes with CPanel (unless that's changed since I
last looked), which is supposed to do a lot of the grunt work for you,
but I have no idea what it's really going to do whenever you play with
the interface. Will it do the job right? Will it do it in a secure
manner, or will it do it insecurely just to make it easier. I have
little faith with these configurator things.
And I have little faith in anti-spam systems, in general. After losing
touch with someone, I (eventually) found out that:
(a) My mails were erroneously being declared to spam (heck knows why,
because I don't do anything that's remotely like spam that could
possibly accidentally become a false positive).
(b) That they couldn't be stuffed doing anything about it. And I'm sure
that's the attitude of a lot of people; it's all too hard, so bury their
head in the sand. The same kind of people who make websites unusable,
then say that they get "no complaints," blithely glossing over the fact
that they made it impossible to register a complaint.
(c) Even those that cared enough to try and fix it, many would be
incapable of doing so.
I gave up trying to use anti-spam systems, myself, long ago, (because of
any false positive being one too many, and the continual manual tweaking
being more painful than just hitting the delete key twice a day) and
concentrated on taking steps to not receive spam, in the first place.
If I have to keep checking a spam box, what's the point of using it.
It's *easier* just to check one inbox, it's been much more effective.
The chief step being to post to this list using an address that's inbox
auto-deletes everything without a special password, and to receive
messages using a second address that isn't publicly exposed on this
list. Long, long, ago, I found that posting to mailing lists was the
main way to get spam, addresses are harvested from them en-masse. Stop
exposing your address, and don't use ones that get easily spammed by
random dictionary attacks, and your spam dwindles significantly.
I also found out that uploading a PGP key to a public server is another
way to receive spam, someone automatically spams addresses they harvest
from them. I could test this rapidly, upload a new key, get spam from
it within a day (permanent ongoing spam, every day, until I do something
about it). Delete an address from a key, and it stops receiving spam
within a couple of days, and stays that way.
The only anti-spam technique I ever had any faith in was using a
honeypot address. Any duplicates of mail received by it, in my other
accounts, will be 100% spam, and can be killed without any worries.
That was relatively easy to implement if I run a mailserver on my own
computer, but much harder to do with externally hosted mail services,
and impossible if the different mail accounts weren't on the same mail
service, other than drag in all external mail, and process the lot on my
own server. But, for some people, that can mean dragging in megabytes
of spam mail, where you wanted to avoid that entirely.
tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Tue May 12 17:42:35 UTC 2015 i686
All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying
to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists.
George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not
a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments.
This seems to explain the issue. Yahoo basically wants everyone to
reject yahoo emails sent from other mail servers, which is what
mailing lists do. But Google is one of the few, I guess, that honor
this request, and that's why it goes to spam no matter what
anti-training is applied.
Old article too, 2014, so not a new problem.
I have a fresh, updated install of Fedora 23 Server. After
installation, I installed the "Basic Desktop" group. Now, when I try to
run startx, it fails with the error:
xf86EnableIOPorts: failed to set IOPL for I/O (Operation not permitted)
Where should I look to diagnose/resolve this? Could this be related to
the fact that my home directories are NFS mounted? (I have set the
use_nfs_home_dirs SELinux setting to "on".)
Braden McDaniel <braden(a)endoframe.com>